Standing US Court ORDERS
And Black Letter Law

Beginning in 1997 the Social Security Administration issued an Executive ORDER
or Fia before a USDC, WDT link restricting
legal discussions to places and times authorized by statute and have successfully defended their
statutory rights from a over 500 challengesA small host of poor bastards who appear to have challenged the Sovereign rights of the
Social Security Administration or Congress appear to have been thrown down the political 5 ton wood chipper and the
confirmed kill list appears to include at least 1 or 2 federal judges; maybe a couple of cabinet level officers; a bunch
of US Attorneys and a many more lesser persons. Whispered in the background are the strange, sacred, and holy legal incantations muttered by
federal officials including Title 18 USC 402 Contempt;
Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction Court Order; tampering with federal agency, Contempt of Congress...

$7,000 To Rent Plaza Suites

I have moved into Plaza Suites in Las Cruces, NM and paid the rent 6 months in advance.
I have spent several thousands of dollars furnishing my new digs which are pretty nice.
Social Security Administrative Law Judges Mark Dawson (NM) and Sandra Rogers (CA) wish to
over turn Commissioner Michael Asture Final Determinatioin of 2007 and of course neither the
former Judge Hererra nor the New US Magistrate Robet Scott are going to support such nonsense.

Commissioner's Final Determiination
Out of Court Settlement/ Can't Be Overturned

Acting Commisssioner Linda McMahon issued a final denial which can only
be overturned or modified in a USDC as cited in Title 42 USC 405(g) Judicial Review:
...No findings of fact or decision by the Commissioner shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or government agency
except as herein provided. No action against the United States, the Commissioner or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought
under Section of 1331 or 1346 of Title 28,United States Code, to recover on any claim arising under this subchapter
This page concerns Administrative Law Judge Sandra Rodgers of Stockton, CA and Mark Dawson of New Mexico attempt to challenge the Commissioner Michael Astures disability determination which can only
be reviewed pursuant to Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts
the right of the Commissioner's final decison to be unimpeachable except to USDC Review some citations are below:
1. Case Law: Walters v Apfel & Asture CA: SA-97-CA-1313 USDC, WDT and being Affirmed by 5th US Circuit
Court of Appeals (99-50174). the Social Security Administration lacks the jurisdictional authority to review the finding of a USDC Judge and is required
to request hearings in Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts
Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:
2. Case Law: Walters v Astrue 09-05206 US Circuit Court DC at the request of
the parties a 3rd party request to interplead was Quashed and no hearing can be held without the Commissioner filing for a Judicil Review
3. In 2007 Commissioner made an admission of fact and law at Bar that Chris Walters is disabled and changes; termination; or suspension of the SSI benefits package are denied by ORDER Of several US Courts at request of SSA Commissioner until such time as
the question of law in heard in USDC Title 42 USC Sec 405(G)H) Judicial Review and challenges
US Supreme Court requirement of fair hearing:
4. Title 18 USC 1509. Obsruction of Court ORDERS
Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime

The question as to wheather Social Security Administrative law Judges Sandra Rogers and Mark Dawson could
challenge the Social Security Administration Commissioner's previous ruling was Quashed by the Court which
requires any additional questions to be heard in a USDC

Dr. Susan Pfeizer
testifies about what she believes Chris Walters medical condition is who
she has never met.

Commissioner's Final Determiination
Out of Court Settlement/Can't Be Overturned

Acting Commisssioner Linda McMahon issued a final denial which can only
be overturned or modified in a USDC as cited in Title 42 USC 405(g) Judicial Review:
...No findings of fact or decision by the Commissioner shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or government agency
except as herein provided. No action against the United States, the Commissioner or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought
under Section of 1331 or 1346 of Title 28,United States Code, to recover on any claim arising under this subchapter

Appeal to Appeals Council

Lacking any jurisdictional standing to overturn the Commissioners Final Determination the
Social Security Administration simply granted 4 years back pay and benefits without
any jurisdictional standing.

Chris Walters
vs.
Michael Astrue
Commissioner SSA
#C080380

The Social Security Administration apparently held a hearing in a state I no longer reside in
after having been given notice I moved. The Social Security Administration has already issued
a final denial by the Commissioner and lacks jurisdictional standing to adjudicate further.
1. Title 42 USC 405(h) Finality of Commissioner’s decision The findings and decision of the Commissioner of Social Security after a
hearing shall be binding upon all individuals who were parties to such hearing. No findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner
of Social Security shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency except as herein provided. No action against
the United States, the Commissioner of Social Security, or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought under section 1331 or
1346 of title 28 to recover on any claim arising under this subchapter.
2. Complaint Walters v Astrue civ-08-380 and Summons issued
April 10th, 2008
3. Notice of Jonder gives notice that Complaint is related to
SSA questions redirected to both Congress and UNHCHR
4. Question to Chief Judge provided to Chief Administrative Law
Judge questions legality of ALJ actions
5. Courtesy Note to Administrative Law Judge Sandra Rogers that
the disability question she is hearing has been moved to USDC, NM
6. Notice of Lack of Standing where Judge Hererra
has ruled in the previous action that both parties lack any standing to
litigate in the Final Determination by SSA Commissioner Linda McMahon

Chris Walters
vs.
Michael Astrue
Commissioner SSA
#C080380

Citation of Authority
Title 42 USC 405 (g)(H) Judicial Review

1. Title 42 USC 405(g) Judicial review
Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which he was
a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action commenced
within sixty days after the mailing to him of notice of such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner
of Social Security may allow. Such action shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial
district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business, or, if he does not reside or have his
principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia.
As part of the Commissioner’s answer the Commissioner of Social Security shall file a certified copy of the transcript
of the record including the evidence upon which the findings and decision complained of are based. The court shall
have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
The findings of the Commissioner of Social Security as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be
conclusive, and where a claim has been denied by the Commissioner of Social Security or a decision is rendered under
subsection (b) of this section which is adverse to an individual who was a party to the hearing before the Commissioner
of Social Security, because of failure of the claimant or such individual to submit proof in conformity with any regulation
prescribed under subsection (a) of this section, the court shall review only the question of conformity with such
regulations and the validity of such regulations.
The court may, on motion of the Commissioner of Social Security made
for good cause shown before the Commissioner files the Commissioner’s answer, remand the case to the Commissioner of
Social Security for further action by the Commissioner of Social Security, and it may at any time order additional
evidence to be taken before the Commissioner of Social Security, but only upon a showing that there is new evidence
which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior
proceeding; and the Commissioner of Social Security shall, after the case is remanded, and after hearing such additional
evidence if so ordered, modify or affirm the Commissioner’s findings of fact or the Commissioner’s decision, or both, and
shall file with the court any such additional and modified findings of fact and decision, and, in any case in which the
Commissioner has not made a decision fully favorable to the individual, a transcript of the additional record and
testimony upon which the Commissioner’s action in modifying or affirming was based.
Such additional or modified
findings of fact and decision shall be reviewable only to the extent provided for review of the original findings
of fact and decision. The judgment of the court shall be final except that it shall be subject to review in the
same manner as a judgment in other civil actions. Any action instituted in accordance with this subsection shall
survive notwithstanding any change in the person occupying the office of Commissioner of Social Security or any
vacancy in such office.
2. Title 42 USC 405(h) Finality of Commissioner’s decision The findings and decision of the Commissioner of Social Security after a
hearing shall be binding upon all individuals who were parties to such hearing. No findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner
of Social Security shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency except as herein provided. No action against
the United States, the Commissioner of Social Security, or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought under section 1331 or
1346 of title 28 to recover on any claim arising under this subchapter.

Exhibit C FBI Admits Interception
USDC ORDER Under Color of US Patriot Act

In 2009 FBI Officials admitted they had been intercepting federal Court
ORDERS and other documents for some years under color of Title 18 Chapter 113b Terrorism
or the US Patriot Act. Exactly how a Federal Court ORDERs; my SSI check; eye glass prescriptions... threatens the national security remains a profound mystery
FBI admits cheating on tests Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 28th Jul 2010
McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON: An undisclosed number of FBI agents have cheated on tests on how to legally conduct domestic surveillance cases, FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged Wednesday, but he added that he is
waiting for the results of an inspector general's investigation to determine how widespread the cheating has become.... The FBI head was asked about the controversy by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,
who heads the committee. Leahy he said he knew that some agents had been caught cheating on the tests, in which they were supposed to show they understood the limitations in conducting domestic surveillance
and beginning cases without first having evidence of a crime. The test is mandatory, and it is put on by the bureau's Domestic Investigation and Operations Guidelines section.
"We are expecting a letter from the IG pointing out other occasions, where there were abuses and the procedures were not followed, with recommendations. And we will follow those recommendations."
Mueller added that "it is quite obviously my concern that all of our personnel understand the parameters in which we are to work." He pledged that eventually all the agents will understand "the limitations of what we can do."

Theft Or Interception
USDC ORDER Deferred US Supreme Court #5

NOW COMES THE Plaintiff Pro Se Chris Walters before the Honorable US District Court of New Mexico to give Notice of a removal of a question of theft/interception of USDC ORDER from the US District Court Walters v Astrue CV-08-380 RHS Docket #13
dated May 1, 2008 to wit:

Jurisdicitonal Authority

Pursuant to Title 28 USC 1251(b) Origional Jurisdiction the United States Supreme Court has origional jurisdiction over causes involving foreign governments where this question and
similar matters are jonded to several organs of the United Nations. The US Congress has already established over sight on these matters under Article 1 Section 1 of the US Constitution

Question of Constituionality of US Patriot Act
& FBI Charter For Abuse of Law Enforcement and Intelligence Assets

Cause of Action

1. Exhibit A copy of the Docket #13 dated May 1st, 2008 an ORDER has been downloaded from the US District Court server which is
missing in the mail, lost, or stolen.
2. Exhibit B: a copy of a recent email from the Honorable US Congressman Jerry McNeney expressing an interest in the matters at bar and again reserving the question to Congressional review as opposed to Court jurisdiction.
Relief Sought
While interception of US District Court ORDERS is a violation of Title 18 USC 402 Contempt and US mail fraud codes the chronic theft/interception/ and loss of mail here in the US District Court of New Mexico is a matter best reviewed by the existing jurisdictional authorities of the United States Congress and United Nations and Chris Walters has no desire to burden the Court further with these question where the action of law have been closed the both Judges have ruled the matter 'well pleaded".
Discussion What anyone would want with an obscure USDC Order from 2 different cases remains a mystery. Chris Walters safe deposit box is full of US Mail which was opened and pilfered last year.
The Registered US Mail from Look Glasses to Chris Walters mail box was unable to travel 1 mile in 6 months. It costs Chris Walters about $500.00 to travel from Lodi, California to Las Cruces, New Mexico to recover the glasses last October.
Respectfully Submitted
Chris Walters, Plaintiff Pro Se
PO Box 232
Las Cruces, NM 88004-0232

Title 18 USC 1702
Obstruction of Correspondence

Loss of a registered US Mail containing my eye glass prescriptions. Title 18 USC 1702
Obstruction of Correspondence Generally: Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from any
letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail carrier, before it has been delivered to the
person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes, embezzles, or destroys
the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Theft Or Interception
USDC Filed US Postal Services Impediment#3

The type and variety of mail I have been missing in Las Cruces suggest the problem might be human.
It is possible the problem could be caused by a sorting machine or whatever
From MailTheft@uspis.gov
tonims2006@gmail.com
dateTue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:19 PM
subjectMail Theft Report
mailed-byuspis.gov
Thank you for completing this form. Your Reference number is: 9380708
The U.S. Postal Inspection Service gathers data on mail-related crime to
determine whether a violation has occurred. While we can't guarantee that
we can recover lost money or items, your information can help alert Inspectors
to problem areas and possibly prevent other people from being victimized.
U.S. Postal Inspectors base their investigations on the number, substance,
and pattern of complaints received from the public. We ask you to keep all
original documents related to your complaint. We will contact you ONLY if
more information is needed.

Exhibit #D-Rented Room At
Plaza Suites $7,000 Through September 2008

I have arrived in New Mexico and rented a room through July, 2008. Have secured PCP at Rio Grande Medical
Group; Colonoscopy set for April 10, 2008 and have possibility of services from Vascular Surgeon. The costs
of moving to Las Cruces, paying rent months in advance and furnishing an apartment is estimated at about
$7,000.00

1. A threat of cutoff of medical benefits in USDC proceedings caused cancelation of
medical appointment instead of leaving thousands of dollars in unpaid medical bills
for doctors to get stuck with.
2. It appears Medicade then went on to assign Salud instead of
the requested provider Lovelace. Attempt to seize or redirect clients medical treatment
are typically violation of Title 18 USCS 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law
per US Supreme Court ruling of Terry Shiavo v Maria Shiavo.

Rio Grande Medical Group declined to fax a copy of the referral to Dr. Michael Keller making
an appointment impossible. Dr. Keller's staff indicated they lost the document sent to them
in the US Mail. It is a great blessing not to be operated on 2 goof balls if they can't
do a simple referral without a major problem.

Dr Flores Prescribes
Avelox- Costs $465.00 A Month

Avelox a new miracle prescription
seems to have good effects on my medical problems:
Bacterial infections are among the most common reasons that people seek health care worldwide.
These infections interfere with activities of daily living, burden the health care system, and
can lead to serious medical complications.
Avelox® (moxifloxacin hydrochloride) is an antibiotic that is highly active against many different
bacteria, including those that are most likely to contribute to acute bacterial sinusitis, acute
exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, and community-acquired pneumonia. Avelox has also been proven
effective in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections and intra-abdominal infections
caused by certain bacteria. Avelox rapidly travels to the site of infection, and provides fast
clinical recovery. Avelox has a well-characterized safety profile, and has been used to treat
more than 40 million patients worldwide.
Please find information about common infections and about Avelox by clicking on the
appropriate links below.

Legal Costs-Capitol Expenditures
$35,000 March-July 2008

Of $13,000 in back pay and regular monies received from March, 2008 until end of July, 2008 monies were spent:
1. $1000.00 Move to Las Cruces, NM
2. $3000.00 Rent Apartment at Plaza Suites
3. $2,000.00 Furnish Apartment at Plaza Suites
4. $4,000.00 Legal Briefs for 2 USDC actions and 1 Appeal to 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals
5. $3,000.00 Computer/Vocational program which is installed in Washington State.
6. $22,000.00 for 200 hours of counsels time preparing and serving legal briefs at
a costs of $110.00 per hours
$35,000.00

Medical Treatment & Costs 2008

1. Hospital Visits

Total: 0

2. Clinic Visits

Total: 5

3. Hotels Nights

Total: $43.65

4. Transportation Costs

Total: $785.00

Why Is The United States Going Broke?
Medical Failure Equal Profit for Hospitals and Doctors

Strange I thought medical professionals were supposed to be healers who resolved medical problems instead of
dragging them out for years and years to increase profits 10 Doctors 5 years to do minor surgery for cancer in office.
45 Doctors took 15 years to do colon exam. 160 Doctors treated chronic blood clots and 4-5 hospitalizations a year
at $400,000 until 1 doctor prescribed Xarelto-a pill a day..131 Doctors Treat Chronic Infection 1 doctor solves problem with hospital visit.
Primary Care Physicians prescribe assisted living as needed for hip replacement....,
how many years will pass before this occurs

Congressional Work Ethic Can
Result In Your Being Volunteered or Drafted

It seems that many Chairman of Congress believe in the concept of work ethic and if they find you on Capitol Hill or too close to something they are working on will actually
have someone volunteered or simply drafted. I-5 Cooridor Agreement origionally on covered portions of California, Oregon,
and Washington but was rapidly expanded by the national leadership to include a third of the United States. Congressman Henry B Gonzalez caught me on Capitol Hill about
1988 circulating one of my publications and had me introduced to the HUD Inspector General.. This assignment lasted until about 1993 when the Clinton Administration came
into power and replaced me with 2 convicted persons who according to press reports were paid $80,000 a year plus expenses..

Prosecutable Federal Offenses

1. Title 18 USC 402 Contempt might include
practicing, vending, or dispensing federal law without license or actual contempt of Court
2. Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction of Court ORDER;
Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or
interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by
this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime
3. Title 18 USC 913 Impersonator Making Arrest
Whoever falsely represents himself to be an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, and in such assumed character arrests or
detains any person or in any manner searches the person, buildings, or other property of any person, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
4. Title 18 USC 371 Conspiracy to Committ an Offense To defraud the United States If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.
5. Title 18 USC 1701 Obstruction of Mail Generally
Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from
any letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail
carrier, before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry
into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes,
embezzles, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
7. Title 18 USC 1512 Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant (
(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward
another person, with intent to— (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to—
(A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object
with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; (C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a
witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person
has been summoned by legal process; or shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
7. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution
or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason
of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year,
or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or
threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

New Mexico "The Most Corrupt State In the United States"

Updated: Wednesday, 21 Jan 2009, 4:28 PM MST
Published : Wednesday, 21 Jan 2009, 1:16 AM MST
Reporter: Tim Maestas ,/br>
Web Producer: Bill Diven
ALBUQUERQUE (KRQE) - A retiring FBI agent in the thick of investigating and prosecuting public officials said
Tuesday New Mexico may be the most corrupt state in the nation. New Mexico has a long list of corrupt politicians, and the list could be growing. High-profile political
figures and associates have been convicted, and ongoing investigations are making frequent headlines.
Many of those cases began with FBI agents in Albuquerque.
"It's our No. 1 criminal program," Thomas McClenaghan, special agent in charge of the FBI Albuquerque
field office, said. Corruption scandals that took down former state Sen. Manny Aragin, once considered
the most powerful politician in the Senate. Former State Treasurer Robert Vigil, his predecessor and a
long list of criminal accomplices have been convicted or cut plea deals in federal court.
McClenaghan will lead Albuquerque's team of FBI agents only through the end of the week. He retires on Friday.
"From what we've seen here, corruption in this state is epidemic," he told KRQE News 13. "It is at all levels
of government." New Mexico is not alone, of course. Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is at the center of a federal investigation that had him arrested late last year.
At the time Special Agent In Charge Rob Grant of the Chicago FBI field office had little good to say about
how Illinois does political business. "If it isn't the most corrupt state in the United States, it is certainly one hell of a competitor," Grant said.
McClenaghan's take? "All I can say is Special Agent In Charge Rob Grant never worked in New Mexico."
That's a strong statement from a man who's made it a point to pursue political corruption aggressively.
When his agents went after Vigil, then the sitting state treasurer, undercover video showed a California financial consultant who was cooperating with the FBI handing him $10,000 in cash.
At Vigil's first trial jurors couldn't decide whether he was guilty or not, and ultimately the evidence was not enough to convict him on 23 counts of racketeering, conspiracy and extortion.
However Vigil was eventually convicted on one count of attempted extortion in 2006.